Game performance competency is an essential component for physical education teaching. This study aimed at designing and validating three scoring rubrics for assessing pre-service teachers' game performance competency in soccer, basketball, and volleyball.
Method
A review of literature on authentic assessments in team sports shed a light for designing the three scoring rubrics named: the Assessing Soccer Game Performance Competency Rubrics (ASGPCR), the Assessing Basketball Game Performance Competency Rubrics (ABGPCR), and the Assessing Volleyball Game Performance Competency Rubrics (AVGPCR). The ASGPCR and the ABGPCR included the same three essential dimensions: skill execution (SE), decision making (DM), and support (SU) proposed by Oslin, Mitchell and Griffin (1998). Each essential dimension included two to four game components, which were defined specifically for soccer and basketball. The AVGPCR included skill execution (SE), decision making (DM), and adjust (AD) which included two game components defined specifically. Thirteen Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) students who enrolled in selected team sports methods course voluntarily participated in this study. We videotaped the participants' playing 10-minute 3 on 3 games at the end of soccer and basketball units and a 20-minute regular volleyball game at the end of the volleyball unit. Each participant's game performance was coded, based on the coding protocols, by two investigators independently using a tally method with the ASGPCR, ABGPCR, and AVGPCR.
Analysis/Results
First, we calculated two investigators' coding results to determine the inter-observer agreement reliability, which was 96%, 99%, and 100% for soccer, basketball, and volleyball lessons. Second, the alpha correlation coefficient of the total scale on the ASGPCR, ABGPCR, and AVGPCR was .88, .95, and.97, respectively, indicating a high degree of internal consistency. Last, the MANOVA was utilized to examine the construct validity of the instruments. The MANOVA indicated significant main effect of the total game performance index between low- and high-game performance groups on the three sports (λ =.21, F=9.89, p<.01; λ =.26, F=7.42, p<.01; λ=.39, F=2.33, p<.01, respectively). Further, the MANOVA revealed significant differences on the SE and the DM (F=24.56, p<.01; F=8.4, p<.05), except for the SU (F=2.8, p>.05) between the groups in soccer. Similar results were held for volleyball (F=10.8, p<.01; F=8.5, p<.05; and F=2.1, p>.10) between the groups. In contrast, the MANOVA yielded significant differences on all three components (F=22.91, p<.01; F=4.46, p=.06; and F=14.89, p<.01, respectively) between the groups in basketball.
Conclusions
The three scoring rubrics were psychometrically sound instruments that can be used for future study.
See more of: Research Consortium